[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d760cf2d0904012032v4b49ccb3gec64c32d4ba4f13f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:02:22 +0530
From: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
edt@....ca, linux-mm-cc@...top.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] compressed in-memory swapping take5
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>
>> Justification for this custom allocator is present in xvmalloc changelog
>> itself. It gives reason for not using SLUB and SLOB. During review
>> cycle, I never got any arguments against that justification.
>
> The use of highmem is pretty unique. But that restrict the usefulness to
> 32 bit processors with too much RAM.
>
>
I would again like to mention that apart from highmem, xvmalloc is O(1)
and is very memory efficient too. Sometime in future I hope to present
it as replacement for funny SLOB allocator. For this I will require lot of
data which is another major work....
For now, I will rename xvmalloc to rzmalloc and move it to
drivers/block/ramzswap. As for data to justify ramzswap inclusion
-- its going to be hard. It just 'feels' lot more responsive with compression
but not sure how to quantify this. Maybe I will get some data
by next release.
Thanks to you all for your reviews and suggestions.
Nitin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists